Quantifying and simulating the weather forecast uncertainty for advanced building control
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Weather forecast uncertainty is unavoidable despite technological advancements. Accurately quantifying and modelling this uncertainty is essential for developing and comparing advanced building controllers. In this study, we present a structured approach using a first-order autoregressive model (AR(1)) to model uncertainty in ambient temperature and global solar irradiation (GHI) forecasts. We analyzed weather data from four cities and employed Jensen–Shannon divergence (JSD) to evaluate the similarity between synthetic and actual forecast errors. The average JSD values for temperature are 0.027 (Berkeley), 0.021 (Leuven), 0.018 (Berlin), and 0.008 (Oslo), and for GHI, the average JSD values are 0.016 (Berkeley), 0.058 (Leuven), and 0.013 (Berlin). The low JSD values indicate a high similarity between the synthetic and real forecast error distributions. Our approach successfully generates synthetic weather forecasts that mirror the statistical properties of actual forecasts. The implementation of our method for uncertain forecast generation is being added to the BOPTEST framework.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it